231–240 of 769 posts
You get steamrolled for defending yourself while you overhear above applause to those who have robbed you of your future.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But it's not like that. Examples of clearly infringing prompts in TFA were as vague as "animated plumber". Asking your session musician for something "melancholy" and having them pass off Stairway to Heaven as original would be unreasonable.
If you ask a human to draw "videogame plumber" they will correctly infer that you mean Mario and draw that. The model isn't doing anything deliberately evil. It's doing exactly what it has been asked. The problem is people are expecting it to have detailed knowledge of trademark law and avoid infringing trademarks, which it hasn't been even asked to do.
IMO that's why there will be but few effective legal restrictions placed on AI.
Once you can reliably ask AIs to draft you terms of service in all applicable jurisdictions and languages, ask it to consult you on how to incorporate in country X or ask it to draft a contract between your and another company based on the negotiation results, lawyers will end up in a huge existential crisis.
Especially because currently, as long as lawyers just barely meet their legal deadlines, it is basically impossible to hold them accountable for however badly they screw you over. A decent AI model could turn out to be a much safer bet than whatever lawyers are available on the jobmarket.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If the child / author then regurgitates entire paragraphs or sections verbatim in his own works and someone notices, you bet there will be a plagiarism lawsuit coming his way.
Wouldn’t this be well handled by suing the person that prompted and distributed the results?
The generative AI rollout has taught me what happens when the interests of the many intersect with the destruction of the few. You get steamrolled for defending yourself while you overhear above applause to those who have robbed you of your future.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> a few copyright holders By which you mean every copyright holder. > AGI in the near future Something that is purely speculative, undefined, and has been promised in the near future for 50+ years. I don't see copyright holders lying down for someone else's benefit and I don't see governments gutting copyright, contract law, and several other avenues of protection that copyright holders can deploy in the name of some…
If a child is instructed to read a copyrighted work at school, which later becomes a factor in his own derivative works, he won't be in breach of copyright. Why should other intelligent entities be prevented from reading copyrighted works and gaining whatever there is to gain from those works the way any human might?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's going to be hard to remove every single "shorthand descriptions of well-known entities" or other prompts that can be used to generate copyrighted or trademarked content. Sure, if you're not deliberately trying to generate infringing content, you can probably remove or discard those results, the trouble is the people who will try to trick the AI to generate this content, blocking those people is going to be impos…
I don't understand why some peoole thinks any infringing content can be singled out and removed. Aren't LLMs giant coefficient matrices like, a punched out croissant dough, made of all training data plyed over? How can you say you can remove one specific ply out of dough and declare that ever potential effect that the offending ply had created is now completely removed?
Or... things are about to get worse for copyright holders. I don't see any developped country pressing the brake on AGI in the near future to protect a few copyright holders from getting "stolen" in hypothetic scenarios.
> a few copyright holders By which you mean every copyright holder. > AGI in the near future Something that is purely speculative, undefined, and has been promised in the near future for 50+ years. I don't see copyright holders lying down for someone else's benefit and I don't see governments gutting copyright, contract law, and several other avenues of protection that copyright holders can deploy in the name of some…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I don't see any developped country pressing the brake on AGI in the near future It’s already happening with EU AI Act https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/headlines/society/202...
AFAIK the EU AI Act primarily prevents profiling, social scoring and other high risk activities from using AI. It generally didn’t care about generative AI.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm sure they're interested in it, but I'm uncertain that they view it as a promising and critical enough capability to push for a higher priority when weighed against other interests. For instance, neither of your examples - surveillance or automated drones - has anything to do with AGI. They don't need LLMs to do mass digital surveillance; they already do that and were doing it for decades before LLMs were a twinkl…
Wiretapping vast amounts of data on the internet is quite cool, but actually sifting through all that data is the really difficult part. Right now intelligence services are probably looking at lots of false positives and lots of dots they can't connect because the evidence is just too dispersed for a human or a current-generation system to make sense. LLMs could enable them to make the analysis more targeted and effe…
How? I'm not trying to be combative, I genuinely am curious if you have an idea how these things could be usefully applied to that problem. In my experience working in the information security space, approximate techniques (neural nets, etc.) haven't gotten much traction. Deterministic detection rules are how we approach the problem of finding the needle in the hay pile. So if you have a concrete idea here that could represent an advancement in this field.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is not about copyright. Think about it. Would you ever actually use generative AI to pirate something when you could just torrent it? While there may be an argument that generative AI is infringing copyright, it is not really a very good tool for it. And there is a worldwide piracy industry already causing much more financial damage due to infringement. This is really about replacement. The copyright holders in…
> Would you ever actually use generative AI to pirate something when you could just torrent it? While there may be an argument that generative AI is infringing copyright, it is not really a very good tool for it. How do you square this with literally the first image in the OP showing side by side GPT reproing copyrighted work? imo a good modern art project would be someone making a website that “archives” NYT article…
Please show me a prompt that reproduces it. Also to pass this test, it has to be just as easy as right clicking "download image"
The images in the article are done in reverse. They find a prompt that shows a copyrighted character and then search for the matching image. That's not how piracy is done.
